To refer to "the belief that the methods of natural science, or
the categories and things recognized in natural science, form the
only proper elements in any philosophical or other inquiry,"[3]
with a concomitant "elimination of the psychological dimensions of
experience".[6][7] It thus
expresses a position critical of (at least the more extreme
expressions of) positivism.[8][9]

Contents

Overview

Reviewing the references to scientism in the works of
contemporary scholars, Gregory R. Peterson[11]
detects two main broad themes:

It is used to criticize a totalizing view of science as if it
were capable of describing allreality and knowledge, or as if it were the only
true way to acquire knowledge about reality and the nature of
things;

It is used to denote a border-crossing violation in which the
theories and methods of one (scientific) discipline are
inappropriately applied to another (scientific or non-scientific)
discipline and its domain. An example of this second usage is to
label as scientism any attempt to claim science as the only or
primary source of human values (a traditional domain of ethics) or as the source of meaning and purpose (a traditional domain of religion and related worldviews).

According to Mikael Stenmark in the Encyclopedia
of science and religion,[12]
while the doctrines that
are described as scientism have many possible forms and varying
degrees of ambition, they share the idea that the boundaries of
science (that is, typically the natural sciences) could and should
be expanded so that something that has not been previously
considered as a subject pertinent to science can now be understood
as part of science (usually with science becoming the sole or the
main arbiter regarding this area or dimension). In its most extreme
form, scientism is the faith
that science has no boundaries, that in due time all human problems
and all aspects of human endeavor will be dealt and solved by
science alone. This idea is also called the Myth of
Progress.[13]
Stenmark proposes the expression scientific expansionism
as a synonym of scientism. E. F. Schumacher critiqued this form
of scientism as an impoverished world view that not only leaves
unanswered, but denies the validity of all questions of fundamental
importance to human existence.[14]

Relevance to the
science and religion debate

Gregory R. Peterson remarks that
"for many theologians and philosophers, scientism is among the
greatest of intellectual sins".[11]
In fact, today the term is often used against vocal critics of
religion-as-such.[15] For
instance, the philosopher of science Daniel Dennett responded to criticism of
his book Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural
Phenomenon by saying that "when someone puts forward a
scientific theory that [religious critics] really don't like, they
just try to discredit it as 'scientism'".[16]
Meanwhile, in an essay that emphasizes parallels between scientism
and traditional religious movements, The
Skeptics Society founder Michael Shermer self-identifies as
"scientistic" and defines the term as "a scientific worldview that
encompasses natural explanations for all phenomena, eschews supernatural and paranormal speculations,
and embraces empiricism and reason as the twin pillars of a philosophy of
life appropriate for an Age of Science."[17]
Psychologist and parapsychologist Charles Tart has described scientism as
being, from a psychological point of view, a form of belief.[18]

Range of
meanings

Standard dictionary definitions include the following
applications of the term "scientism":

The use of the style, assumptions, techniques, and other
attributes typically displayed by scientists.[19]

Methods and attitudes typical of or attributed to the natural
scientist.[20]

An exaggerated trust in the efficacy of the methods of natural science
applied to all areas of investigation, as in philosophy, the social
sciences, and the humanities.[21]

"A term applied (freq. in a derogatory manner) to a belief in
the omnipotence of scientific knowledge and techniques; also to the
view that the methods of study appropriate to physical science can
replace those used in other fields such as philosophy and, esp.,
human behaviour and the social sciences." [24]

The belief that scientific knowledge is the foundation of all
knowledge and that, consequently, scientific argument should always
be weighted more heavily than other forms of knowledge,
particularly those which are not yet well described or justified
from within the rational framework, or whose description fails to
present itself in the course of a debate against a scientific
argument. It can be contrasted by doctrines like historicism, which hold
that there are certain "unknowable" truths.[25]

As a form of dogma: "In
essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only
justifiable access to the truth."[26]

References

^
Scientism: "an exaggerated trust in the efficacy of the methods
of natural science applied to all areas of investigation (as in
philosophy, the social sciences, and the humanities)"
definition from: Ryder, Martin. "Scientism." Encyclopedia of
Science Technology and Ethics. 3rd ed. Detroit: MacMillan
Reference Books, 2005.

^ ab
Scientism: "Pejorative term for the belief that the methods of
natural science, or the categories and things recognized in natural
science, form the only proper elements in any philosophical or
other inquiry. The classic statement of scientism is the physicist
E.
Rutherford's saying 'there is physics and there is
stamp-collecting.'", definition from The Oxford Dictionary
of Philosophy. n.d.

^
After reviewing the usage of the term by contemporary scholars,
Gregory R Peterson concludes that "the best way to understand
the charge of scientism is as a kind of logical fallacy involving
improper usage of science or scientific claims." (p.753).
From: "Peterson, Gregory R. (2003) Demarcation and
the Scientistic Fallacy. Zygon: Journal of Religion and
Science38 (4), 751-761. doi:
10.1111/j.1467-9744.2003.00536.x"

^Scientism by Martin Ryder
- University of Colorado. (Accessed: July 05 2007)